Miss L. Toe

It'll be the 2,700 lawyers that both sides have hired to fight the results
afterwards !

nitram

On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 09:25:45 -0000, "Miss L. Toe"
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >It'll be the 2,700 lawyers that both sides have hired to fight the results
    >afterwards !

Far more, BBC R4 mentioned 10,000 Democrat lawyers this a.m.
--
Martin

Miguel Cruz

<[email protected]> wrote:
    > "Miss L. Toe" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> It'll be the 2,700 lawyers that both sides have hired to fight the results
    >> afterwards !
    > Far more, BBC R4 mentioned 10,000 Democrat lawyers this a.m.

Did they just add up the number of attorneys who work for the various firms
that the Democratic party has engaged?

"Lessee, they used Blenkins & Fritzmore for the lease in Boston last year,
and they have 520 lawyers on staff... they used Frotsky Mumblechops Rancor &
Stew for that logo trademark thing, and they've got what, 900 attorneys over
at Frotsky?"

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu

Nobody

"Miss L. Toe" wrote:
    >
    > It'll be the 2,700 lawyers that both sides have hired to fight the results
    > afterwards !

In a recent canadian election, it was feared that our bush equivalent (The
reform party) might get a minority government according to polls. Turns out
that the polls were quite wrong and the liberals got a minority and the reform
didn't get anywhere near the number of seats that had been anticipated.

So on tuesday night, it is possible that the vote might not be that close.

Also, since the Bush regime listens to all telephone conversations, it is
possible that americans, fearing a trip to prison, would all answer they
support Bush on the phone, but when the time comes to vote, they will enjoy a
rare moment of privacy and vote this orwelian regime out of office. (unless
voting booths are staffed by machine gun toting military personel "to make
people feel safe".).

Now, should Kerry win, hopefully they can begin impeachement process the next
day so that Bush, Rumsfeld/Cheney/Wolfowitz will be charged before January
17th :-) :-) :-)


In the end, it seems that the Bush regime's policy of controling media and
brainwashing americans into a constant fear of terrorism may work and give
this war criminal a second term. Remember that this technique even got the
democrats until Howard Dean showed up.

Ted Ng

"nobody" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

    > Also, since the Bush regime listens to all telephone conversations, it is

I see you pulled another all-nighter. Your above statement is further
evidence of paranoia.

Tom Bellhouse

"Ted Ng" <ted_ng@[nospam].com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > "nobody" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > Also, since the Bush regime listens to all telephone conversations,
it is
    > I see you pulled another all-nighter. Your above statement is further
    > evidence of paranoia.

Actually, it's true.
http://tinyurl.com/5gejk
or
http://www.infinisource.com/features/echelon.html

"Anyone who uses a communications device, including Internet users,
mobile PC users and users of cell phones who engage in questionable
conversations, can pretty much count on being subjected to scrutiny.
Scrutiny from investigating sources can involve accessing not only the
content of the questionable conversation(s), but extends to all
"associated data".
"Associated data includes communications made before and after a
questionable conversation. Despite what we have seen on movies, even
connections that are not completed are recorded for evaluation."

I have probably triggered the system by using the word "Echelon" in this
email. Had I discussed a "hot" topic and used certain key words, my
post would zoom to the top of the pile for human scrutiny and follow-up.

It's not paranoia, just reality.

Tom

Ted Ng

"Tom Bellhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > "Ted Ng" <ted_ng@[nospam].com> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    >> "nobody" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> news:[email protected]...
    >> > Also, since the Bush regime listens to all telephone conversations,
    > it is

JF, Echelon has existed a long time. It pre-dates Bush. Since Canada
owns a piece of Echelon, does Paul Martin listen to your phone calls?

    >> I see you pulled another all-nighter. Your above statement is further
    >> evidence of paranoia.
    > Actually, it's true.
    > http://tinyurl.com/5gejk

Actually, it's not. That is the website of the Communist Workers
Party. Did you think I wouldn't notice?

    > http://www.infinisource.com/features/echelon.html

That's the best you can do? I was hoping for a cite from "Journal
of the ACM" or one of the IEEE magazines.

    > "Anyone who uses a communications device, including Internet users,
    > mobile PC users and users of cell phones who engage in questionable
    > conversations, can pretty much count on being subjected to scrutiny.
    > Scrutiny from investigating sources can involve accessing not only the
    > content of the questionable conversation(s), but extends to all
    > "associated data".
    > "Associated data includes communications made before and after a
    > questionable conversation. Despite what we have seen on movies, even
    > connections that are not completed are recorded for evaluation."

Bullcrap. Echelon is most likely a real program, with capabilities that
have been wildly exaggerated by the paranoid. Just like conspiracy
kooks are convinced that there is something more to Area 51 than
aircraft experimentation, conspiracy kooks are convinced that Echelon
monitors (and even understands) every phone call made.

    > I have probably triggered the system by using the word "Echelon" in this
    > email. Had I discussed a "hot" topic and used certain key words, my
    > post would zoom to the top of the pile for human scrutiny and follow-up.

Believing this may boost your ego, but I doubt very much you or I are
important enough to be monitored for what we say in a newsgroup,
Tom. Assuming terrorists post to Usenet to communicate between cells,
they would use a pre-determined code that doesn't involve key words.
They wouldn't type, "We will meet in MacArthur Park at 6:00 tomorrow.
Bring your bomb."

    > It's not paranoia, just reality.

It's both. Since the governments involved with Echelon, including the
US, UK, New Zealand, Canada and Australia, won't (for obvious
reasons) say what its capabilities are, any claims about its powers are
pure speculation.

Rather than listening to conspiracy kooks and Communist Workers
Party rants (I still can't believe you'd expect me to treat that as a
serious reference), let's examine what the computer geeks familiar
with the limitations of computing say about it.

"Get some of those articles that purport to describe the ability of the
Echelon system to do marvellous things, and [think through] the
engineering work," the official suggested. "Figure out how much
processing power it would require, the types of collaboration one
would need with people who build telecommunications systems,
and the amount of government employees you would need to read
all the stuff that gets scooped out. We just haven't got it."

"We're the government," he quipped. "Why would you reasonably
expect us to be any more advanced than the private sector?"

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/08...y_exaggerated/

This is also an interesting read.
http://www.intelbriefing.com/echmyth.htm